lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANP3RGf9YVSqFv1sL_smxp0ci0p=k=gtT==dmtVSeGht2g_HZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Mar 2018 10:54:36 -0800
From:   Maciej Żenczykowski <zenczykowski@...il.com>
To:     Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: Reflect MTU changes on PMTU of exceptions for
 MTU-less routes

Conceptually this is right.

And I'm 100% fine with dev mtu change triggering pmtu decrease.

I'm not so sold on the pmtu increase.

PMTUD is one of those things that never ever works right in practice.
There's too many icmp blackholes, rate limits, overloaded management
cpus in switches,
misconfigurations, missing tcp mss clamps, icmps routed differently
then the flows due to ecmp hashing, middle boxes that don't affect the
icmp but change the tcp stream, etc.

In particular there's a lot of routing hardware that can handle
gigabits or terabits of traffic, but can generate only 10s-100s of
packet too big messages per second (ie. a tiny fraction of line rate
pps).  Worse yet, under overload it often falls back to simply
dropping and generating no icmp errors.

I spend a significant fraction of my time making sure we never rely on PMTUD.

Debugging MTU related blackholes is a constant bane of my existence.

[btw. we're considering adding a hack to always fragment UDP to
min(1280, dev/route/path mtu)...]

Basically: lower is always better because it's more likely to work...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ